Re: Naming debate- what's the location for it?

[Brent Laabs]

Thanks for the summary of the high points, as there were a large number of
low points in previous discussions.

Roku is not the only reading for 六 in Japanese, the kun reading is muttsu.
So we could become Mupperl.  What's the counter word for computer
languages, anyway?



On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Aaron Sherman  wrote:

> I think this is a fine place, personally. Past discussions have included
> these high points as I recall them:
>
>
>1. Perl is definitely the family name
>2. Rakudo started out as the name of an implementation, but started to
>wander into being the name of the specific leaf in the family tree
>3. Problem is that that leaves us uncertain of the status of
>non-Rakudo-the-implementation implementations. Are they now Rakudo too?
>That's confusing at best.
>
>
> IMHO, 6 has always been the personal name, but it could be changed to
> something that's "sixish" without being an explicit number. Normally, I'd
> recommend Latin, but Perl Sex is probably not where anyone wants to go...
> Roku is Japanese, but also the name of a popular device, and thus
> confusing...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Aaron Sherman, M.:
> P: 617-440-4332 <(617)%20440-4332> // E: a...@ajs.com
> Toolsmith, developer, gamer and life-long student.
>
> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 10:41 AM, yary  wrote:
>
>> I recall coming across a post saying the Perl6 name is up for discussion
>> - searched & found this post now https://6lang.party/post/The-H
>> ot-New-Language-Named-Rakudo describes it. Is there a forum where the
>> name's being discussed that I can read?
>>
>> Woke up this morning with a name proposal that seemed to have a lot going
>> for it, but from that post it seems Lizmat et al have a good choice already
>> & I don't want to add to bikeshedding... wondering what the thinking is
>> right now.
>>
>> -y
>>
>
>

Re: Is this a bug?

[Brent Laabs]

Remember you can call a block with parentheses:

> say { 11 + 31 };
-> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|140268472711224) ... }
> say { 11 + 31 }();
42


On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Elizabeth Mattijsen 
wrote:

> I think you want:
>
>   .say for reverse lines;
>
> not sure what you are trying to achieve otherwise, but:
>
>say { }
>
> producing something like
>
>-> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|170303864) … }
>
> feels entirely correct to me.   :-)
>
>
> Liz
>
> > On 18 Sep 2016, at 21:52, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > This code:
> > 1 #! /home/guru/bin/perl6
> > 2
> > 3 # Ask for some lines and output them in reverse
> > 4 # Work out the appropriate EOF symbol for the OS
> > 5
> > 6 my $EOF = "CTRL-" ~ ($*DISTRO.is-win ?? "Z" !! "D");
> > 7
> > 8 say "Please enter some lines and end them with $EOF";
> > 9
> > 10 say { for reverse lines() {} };
> > 11
> > 12 # End
> > produces this:
> > Please enter some lines and end them with CTRL-D# obviously from
> line 8
> > -> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|170303864) ... }# but
> this?
>
>

Re: Types for Perl 6: request for comments

[Brent Laabs]

On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Giuseppe Castagna 
g...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr wrote:



 my $sub = do {
 proto foo (|) { * }
 multi foo (Int $x) { $x + 1 }
 multi foo (Str $y) { $y ~ 'a' }

 foo;
 }


 Oh yes, nice ... I think I will add it in my paper (and if you send me
 your full name I will give credits to you)


The do block version to make anonymous sub was my work, Brent Laabs.
Using lexical subs to emulate anonymous multi subs was the first thing to
come to mind when I read that Perl 6 didn't have them.  Unfortunately, I
haven't had time to read the rest of your paper, maybe this weekend.

Re: Types for Perl 6: request for comments

[Brent Laabs]

Subs are lexical by default, so adding my to the function declarators does
nothing.

Not sure what anon is doing there.  My guess is that anon in sink context
does nothing, and Rakudo just builds another proto for foo when it sees the
first multi.  Protos are optional (but not in the compiler itself!), so
that first line is redundant but good practice.

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 5:26 PM, yary not@gmail.com wrote:

 These two variations on Brent's work the same as the original- what subtle
 differences happen by adding anon or my to the declarations?

 my $sub_anon = do {
 anon proto foo (|) { * }
 multi foo (Int $x) { $x + 1 }
 multi foo (Str $y) { $y ~ 'a' }

 foo;
 }

 my $sub_my = do {
 my proto foo (|) { * }
 my multi foo (Int $x) { $x + 1 }
 my multi foo (Str $y) { $y ~ 'a' }

 foo;
 }

Re: Anonymous multi-subs

[Brent Laabs]

I'll just note that you can fake anon multi subs with lexical subs like
this:

my $sub = do {
proto foo (|) { * }
multi foo (Int $x) { $x + 1 }
multi foo (Str $y) { $y ~ 'a' }

foo;
}

say $sub(hello);

The sub there is still named foo as attested by $sub.name, but isn't
available under that name outside of the do block.


On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Jon Lang datawea...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Wednesday, June 24, 2015, yary not@gmail.com wrote:

 Now that I've thought about it for 90 seconds (not fully-formed idea), if
 one were to have an anonymous multi-sub, it ought to be constructed from a
 list of *signature*, *body *pairs.

 And/or, any non-finalized sub could have a method to add another *signature,
 body* to its dispatch list.

 apologies if this discussion is already captured in a design doc, I am
 posting this without having read much of the past.


  Or, in the body, be able to examine the actual signature passed in and
 decide what to do based on that,  That [i]could[/i] be done using a
 given/when structure, which would be equivalent to a list of signature/body
 pairs.


 --
 Jonathan Dataweaver Lang

Re: Language design

[Brent Laabs]

Yes, unpredictable performance is a price I'm willing to pay.  I'm using a
dynamic language after all.

If you aren't willing to pay it, just use typed variables.  Or even native
types, like num or int.  Choose your own number representation -- there's
more than one way to do it.

The design philosophy in Perl 6 to make common things easy and other things
possible; pathological number sequences are not the common case.

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Michael Zedeler mich...@zedeler.dk wrote:

 ...and unpredictable performance is a cost you're willing to pay?

 M.


  The Sidhekin wrote 

 On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 10:02 PM, Michael Zedeler mich...@zedeler.dk
 wrote:

 I'm not saying that there isn't any alternative to the way other
 languages implements floats, but Rats in particular seems to require a
 nondeterministic algorithm in order to be of practical use.

   Rats means never having to worry about inaccurate float representations.

 $ perl -E '$i+=0.1 for 0..1000; say for $i, $i cmp 100.1' # oops …
 100.0999
 -1
 $ perl6 -e 'my $i; $i+=0.1 for 0..1000; .say for $i, $i cmp 100.1'
 100.1
 Same
 $

   Float inaccuracy is one of the things I'm really looking forward to
 forgetting. :)


 Eirik